have seen. there is an enormous amount of material here. it is a broad resource. we are not going to be able to touch on very much of it in this session this morning, but in order to help you, we've also produced what you have at your place, which is a reporting brief. this is your cliff notes.

fundamentally added a story of growth. growth in funding, in personnel, in technology. particularly in the decade since 9/11. so what we see from that story of growth are some rather dramatic, what we think of as top line findings. first is that spending for the immigration enforcement agencies today, adjusted for inflation, is 15 times what it was for i.n.s. in 1986 when we believe the current era of immigration enforcement began. that is a conservative

estimate, and if anybody wants to parse with that later, we'd tell you how we came to that estimate. that is a conservative estimate. most likely the spending is almost possibly considerably more than what it is we estimated. in relative terms, what this means is that the united states government now spends more on immigration enforcement than on all other principal law enforcement agencies combined. we are spending as of fiscal year 2011, which is the most recent year for the data that we're using that was available, that's the price tag of $18 billion. that is 24% greater than the $14.4 billion that funds the f.b.i., the d.e.a., the secret service, the a.t.f. and the

u.s. marshal service. this is a historic reversal, because in 1986 when this all began, i.n.s. comprised 28% of the spending of all of the other law enforcement agencies. and if you look at page 22 of your engineering manual, you will see a graph that very clearly shows this and what a historic change has taken place over this period of time. border enforcement by far is the largest share of this spending. it's the largest spending for everything in the immigration system, all of the other immigration functions, and among other things it's made possible the doubling of the border patrol in just the last eight years from $10,819 to where it stands today which is

in the neighborhood of 21,370. but even though c.v.p. and its growth is enormous, the growth of i.c.e. is also very substantial. that growth has been 87% since 2005, from a number of $3.1 billion to today about $5.9 billion. so those are the big framing points that i hope paints a picture of what it is that we're doing in this report. let me now go to a couple pillars that i'm going to say some things about and then turn it over to my colleagues. the first of the pillars that we discussed is as you would manage, border enforcement, and that of course is the most longstanding of the elements of the immigration enforcement system and of course the most visible and well-known. but in addition to the resource

story, which is the fundamental story about border enforcement and also the emphasis on national security, which is now so prominent in border enforcement functions and in thinking, there are two other key developments that i want to pull out of this report to just highlight for a moment. one is that the border patrol announced a new strategic plan last spring which did not get very much attention at all, but it is a strategic plan which is a four-year plan. it's established for 2012 through 2016, and it is quite remarkable in that compared with anything that we've seen in the past as strategic plans for the border patrols, it calls for risk-based enforcement and says that its resource base has been built. therefore, the resource base that is in place allows for responses to be targeted based

on information and integration of efforts in rapid response. it is not projecting a need for additional resources. it depicts a steady state of refining its programs and remarkably talks a great deal about cooperation with other countries particularly across border cooperation with mexico. so that's quite a notable change from what we have seen in the past. the other thing about the border enforcement pillar that is very significant to understand in terms of the regs rest of what it is to be talked about is something called the consequence delivery system. the consequence delivery system, as we are calling it consequence enforcement as a shorthand, is based on the fact that the sustained level of resource infusions that have taken place for border enforcement have allowed for

significant changes in enforcement practices. instead of the revolving door, which is of course the enduring image of southwest land border enforcement, what is happening now is that the border patrol is employing enforcement tactics that imposes consequences beyond simple voluntary return on almost everyone that is arrested at the southwest border. the purpose, they say, is to break smuggling cycles and to disrupt the networks that sustain illegal immigration and the effort is to separate the illegal migrant from the smuggler and thereby raise the cost. examples of consequence enforcement are lateral repatriation. you get arrested in one place, you get put in a place far away. expedited removal, which is in wide scale spread use now at the southwest border. operation streamline which is

something that many of you have heard about. but the result is that whereas in the past we basically had a set of practices at the southwest border where 90% of the people arrested were voluntarily returned and therefore this revolving door pattern of behavior. that is now entirely flipped. voluntary return is the exception. it is being used only by in large in humanitarian cases under special circumstances. it is the exception, not the rule. so there are consequences much greater for people who do attempt to cross and that is having significant downstream effects again as is evident in the rest of the report and probably will be touched on by my colleagues. significant effects both on the mige rants themselves -- migrants themselves and the system itself and other

agencies. so among the findings where border enforcement is concerned, our historic highs in staffing, technology, infrastructure, as against 40-year now lows in apprehensions. apprehensions just since 2008 have fallen 53%. at the same time, the enforcement has been significantly strengthened between ports of entry, ports of entry themselves have lagged behind and could very well become a weak link of southwest border enforcement. they may already be. the needs with land border port enforcement particularly rests on infrastructure where the infrastructure is simply not able to deal with the technology advances that indeed have been made to deal with more effective crossings. but as the southwest land border enforcement does improve, what we are going to see is an increasing share of the unauthorized population in

the united states to the extent that it continues to exist be made up of visa overstayers rather than of people crossing the border without documents. and that would also change the ethnic and nationality makeup of the unauthorized population because it will be far less, people coming from mexico and central america than from other countries around the world. now, the second pillar that we talk about is travel. i'm actually really almost finished. so the next one that we talk about is travel and visa screening and that is a subset of border enforcement. it has become very successful as well, but it is heavily dependent on data issue improvements, and i'm going to skip the travel screen, therefore, and go to the data issue improvements, because

that is a third pillar that is a relatively new dimension of enforcement as we see it. the information and data interoperability changes that have taken place really rise to the level of being a pillar because they are so significant. it's hard to overstate the importance of the database changes and immigration enforcement. major investments have been made in building and linking databases across law enforcement intelligence agencies and the access to this information enables searches of terrorist connections, criminal background and immigration history at every step in the admissions and immigration processes. the heart of this is the biometric fingerprint system. that's the key database. although it dates back into the 1990's, it really has had enormous investment and

expansion since 9/11. it now stores over 148 million records. they grow at a rate of 10 million a year. it is the largest law enforcement biometric database in the world. it's enabled advances in every other pillars, protocols that rely on comprehensive -- it is now embedded in all criminal -- in all critical immigration processes and practices. today noncitizens are screened at more times against more databases which contain more detailed data than ever before. so the significance of these new capabilities becomes very clear in discussing the other pillars, which my colleagues will take up in order, beginning with dr. chisti. >> thank you, doris.

thank you so much and good morning and happy new year to all of you. i'll go as quickly as i can, talk as fast as my natural tendencies. doris, i'll deal with the two pillars. the workplace enforcement and the intersection of criminal justice system and immigration enforcement. on the work force enforcement, doris, as you just heard, refers to 1986 as the dawn of the current era on immigration. for those of us who cut our teeth in the 1986 law and almost all of these members of the panel who is too young, i'm not sure it feels as a compliment. but i think it reminded us that when we do these exercises in legislation making that each sentiment is based on something else. and the whole machinery that we have built today is essentially built on milestones, some of

them major and some of them minor. 1986 was a major milestone in america's commitment to immigration enforcement. i think students of immigration history today will not recognize how important philosophically that shift was. before 1986, the states will say that employers in the country taught the ability to hire unauthorized workers was as sacrosanct as the second amendment. that it was god's right to hire anyone that they wanted. and understanding fundamentally altered in 1986. it was so controversial that in the whole spectrum from the chamber of commerce to the aclu opposed employer sanctions and despite opposition, congress enacted the employer sanctions laws in 1986. as all of you know, it ushered in the sanctions employers were hiring unauthorized workers. but it was soon clear that this

was not a very effective new law enforcement tool for two reasons. employers figured there was compliance with the law from the law enforcement agencies, and, two, they found it easy to comply with the law by just using a large number of documents that could meet the requirement of the law, many of them could be fraudulently obtained. therefore since then, government has been trying to see whether there could be a more automaticed electronic verification system to get around proliferation of the documents that we use to meet the compliance of employer sanctions law. and beginning in 1986, we started testing various programs to do this thing in an electronic automatic way. in 1996, congress authorized the basic pilot which by now in 2007 is now called the everify

program and this was a voluntary program in which people, employers give the information about the identity and the authorization to work of a job applicants which is screened against s.s.a.'s and d.h.s.'s database to determine the eligibility to work. now, this -- the basic pilot program, as i said, is a voluntary program, but it has grown exponentially while we have been testing it as a voluntary program. in -- just put it in context, in 2006, there are only 10,000 employers who enrolled in the everify program. currently there are 350,000 employers enrolled in the everify program. last year we checked 17 million squaries a year are sent to the everify program. and this also -- that may represent a lot to me but it only represents 10% of the u.s. business establishments. while the everify has gone on

at the federal level, we all know that states have been business in enacting their own everify law. it was a trend that was made notorious by arizona's law in 2007 which went all the way up to the supreme court and in 2011, july, the supreme court upheld the legality of the state everify laws. with the result of today there are 19 states in the country which allow some or all employers to be enrolled in everify. now, everify, many of you know suffered from a lot of criticism. that it generates false positives. that it generates false negatives. but studies over time have also shown that these error rates have steadily gone down. in fact the government accountability office most recent report found the error rate is now pretty close to about 2.6%. so therefore while this has grown, it has also improved, but there is one element in the

everify which has not actually kept pace with the demand which is the ability to identify the applicants whose data is actually presented. we don't have a very good matching ability the person whose information being sent is actually the person who is being hired. but despite these weaknesses, everify, one has to say, has left the station. it is not any more a phenomenon. those pilot programs that resulted in the termination of everify, i think that speculation is over. everify will remain a permanent part of our immigration legal system. the only issue is at what pace and in what level will it become mandatory, and how do we determine the deficiencies that are currently in the system. there are two other developments which i will quickly touch on in the work

force enforcement system. one i think many of you know that the bauks fundamentally shifted its poll di-- obama administration fundamentally shifted its policy by moving away from targeting unauthorized immigrants through high-profile rates to targeting actually employers who hire unauthorized workers. since june -- since january of 2009, i.c.e. has audited more than 8,000 employers. it has debarred 726 companies and imposed about $88 million in criminal monetary fines on employers. a very significant -- and the last thing on the work force that i will touch on is there has been an increased effort on the labor standards enforcement in our country. we all know that labor standards enforcements always takes less priority in our overall enforcement system. there are only 1,100 inspectors in the division to monitor about more than 7.5 million

u.s. business establishments. that obviously is not going to do the job as efficiently as one would like to. therefore, the department of labor has more recently gone into more smarter, more targeted enforcement of those employers who habitually violate the laws on the books on labor standards. and in industries where there are major dominant employers who may be outsourcing, who may be franchising or who may be the top level of the supply chain, the department of labor is increasingly going after the big dominant employers for the violation of the lower chain supply. let me shift quickly to the immigration criminal -- the intersection of the criminal justice system. i think if i said the 1986 was a philosophical departure, i think students of immigration history 50 years from now will definitely agree that in the

immigration enforcement history, 1996 will go down as before christ and after christ moment in our enforcement statute. it was for the first time many of us who were involved in the -- in that exercise from outside and inside the government know that congress took heap intact the legal immigration system decided to enact measures which essentially squashed the policy to unauthorized immigrants and especially immigrants of criminal history. and it unleashed in the process extraordinary unprecedented intersection between our criminal justice system and immigration enforcement. clearly unprecedented immigration history, i would like to say it's also unprecedented in almost any enforcement history. and it did by developments which many of you are familiar. i summarize them as five

developments which have led to the trend which has produced the number of -- of the country today which don will talk about. the first is we made more immigration violations that used to be civil violations into federal crimes. we impose new initiatives and funding target -- and target those kinds for prosecution which were now made crimes. and we increased the number of federal and state crimes which have the automatic consequence of removal from the country. fourth is that we moved the discretion of immigration judges to consider positive equities that can be taken into account as someone could be removed from the country. and last is that we initiated new programs, mostly cooperative federal and state and local programs where we funnel criminal suspects and criminal convicts into the

machinery. and the results of all these five developments are starkly for all to see. first, there has been an unprecedented number increased in the number of criminal prosecutions for immigration related violations. from 2001 to 2009, the criminal prosecution for immigration related crimes rose six-fold from about 16,000 to 92,000 a year. to me much more importantly has been the ratio of immigration related crimets as a percentage -- crimes as the percentage of prosecution of all time. today, immigration -- in 2003 if you looked at the record, the prosecution for immigration-related crimes accounted for about 17% to 0% of all federal prosecution -- 20% of all federal prosecution of crimes. in 2008 that number jumped to

50%. 50% of all federal prosecution crimes are now related to immigration. to put this in context, i'll cite only three findings that remain. that if we look at today, the custom and border patrol people, forward more cases to the prosecution than the f.b.i. does. if you put the c.b.p. and i.c.e. together, they refer more cases for criminal prosecution than all of d.o.j.'s law enforcement agencies combined. the number that doris cited for you. there are five judicial districts along the u.s.-mexico border which are cracker jack -- account for 10% of the u.s. population. they now account for half of all federal felony prosecutions in the united states. now, many people believe that

despite -- in federal prosecutions is the result of a program called operation streamline that doris referred to. it's a d.h.s. program that started in one border district in 2005. today, it has been extended to six of all nine districts on the border. it's a scheme in which magistrate judges hear cases of federal -- of immigration violations en masse. there are group hearings held at the end of which people are removed from the united states. the d.h.s. calls it zero tolerance policy to unauthorized immigration and wants to treat everyone who crosses the doubt of -- who makes an entry illegally to the -- obviously it cannot prosecute everyone, but the numbers are about 30,000 cases a year go through the operation streamline. the second phenomenon that has happened, as i mentioned, it increased in the state and federal crimes that have the

automatic consequences for removal. we know that the u.s. has not historically been very receptive to criminal aliens, but until recently, we only used to remove people who committed major crimes. these are crimes of moral terptude, domestic violence, and then aggravated felony. it's a term peculiar to immigration law and has come now to include 50 separate crimes in 31 different categories, many of them are minor crimes. somebody with misdemeanors. and congress in its wisdom decided to apply it retroactively. so today there are a large number of longstanding immigrants, many of them lawful permanent residents who have been removed from the country for crimes and some minor crimes that they committed many years ago. as important as the -- as the

legislative developments of increasing the definition of crimes are the new cooperative agreements between states, localities and the federal government for screening suspects for their removal, and all of you know these are -- the famous programs of the criminal alien program that -- the fugitive operation program. just to put it into context, the funding for these programs, which has actually really shocked me, the funding of these programs from 2004 to 2011 has risen from $23 million to $690 million. those of you do the math, that's about 2,900% change in the funding of these programs. and obviously the results are here to see.

we have seen a huge growth in the criminal alien program which now puts about half of all the people in the immigration detention in the country. the fugitive operation program has grown about 10 times in the last eight -- in the last eight years. and today only about 28% of people unfortunately through the fugitive operation program are criminal fugitives. the 287-g program, which is scaling down, still operation about 57 jurisdictions, has all scaled up tremendously in 2006 to 2008, mostly in the southeast sector of the country. about half the people move to the 287-g program do not fit the priority level of the government. these are not hard, dangerous criminals. and the last program, which i'll conclude with, which is the most recent entry to this

collection of cooperative programs, which has become dominant,. today it covers about 3,074 jurisdictions. it will become universal all across the country by march of 2013. initially it was built as a voluntary program. >> [inaudible] >> but that -- but that no longer has become a voluntary program. many states try to opt out of the program. and in august of 2011, the d.h.s. secretary took them out of their misery and said that every fingerprint that is submitted by the government -- to the federal government can be shared with any other part of the government. so the securities community program has also left -- that train has also left the station and therefore it's expected to become a permanent part of our immigration enforcement system.

thank you. >> i'd like to have a real conversation with the audience. i'd like to appreciate it to keep it within time in order to take questions. don. >> ok. thank you. they moved us through this system in a somewhat linear way. i'll talk about the removal and detention processes which are basically the end of the line for many people who come in contact with the enforcement system. i'll highlight four of the report's findings on removal. some parallel findings on detention. discuss detention reform and raise one challenge related to the court system. on removal, first as my colleagues highlighted, removals have increased dramatically over the last quarter of a century. since 1986 there have been more than four million deportations from the united states. between f.y. 1990 and f.y. 2012, the removals rose from 30,000 a year to almost 410,000

per year. of all the enforcement fillers, removals have the greatest impact on immigrant families. one telling statistic from the report is that i.c.e. has reported 46,486 noncitizens with the u.s. citizen child who were removed over just a six-month period in 2011. removals have risen steadily over many administrations, democratic and republican, but they've certainly accelerated in recent years. the last four years have seen about 1.6 million removals. i think many have questioned why an administration that's devoted to comprehensive reform would remove the greatest number of people of any in u.s. history. and the report provides a partial answer at the least which is the legal authorities, the operational systems, the enforcement programs and the financial investments since 1986 have made large-scale

removals almost at an inevidentibility. they've made high levels of enforcement and institutional -- an institutional authority. as muz kind of referenced the 1996 immigration act, also known as i.r.a., was a particular turning point. it built on a trend hearkening back to 1998 of expanding the crimes leading to automatic removal and mandatory detention and limiting relief from removal. our second finding has to due with the increased informality of the removal process. there is a widespread relief that they'll have their day in court and a judge will determine if they have to stay or stay after a formal hearing. in fact, increasing numbers of noncitizens are being removed and expedited in summary ways.

expedited removals, for example, now account for roughly 30% of all removals. the expedited process is carried out by d.h.s. and was first applied to persons encountered at ports of entry who had false documents. it has since been expanded to those entering by seas and those arrested near 100 miles of land border. and removals were persons previously ordered removed who illegally re-entered the country. i.c.e. reinstates the prior order of removal. there are also large numbers of administrative removals, tens of thousands each year. they involve people who are not lawful permanent residents but those convicted of aggravated felonies which as muz mentioned is kind of an expansive category of crimes. and finally thousands are removed each year based on stipulated orders of removal and a typical stipulated order

case, a nonrepresented detainee signs a form agreeing that they're removeable and have no relief available which they often do to avoid further detention. and i.c.e. detention officers and counsel do most of the work in filing the stipulated order. and the judge confirms that the order was knowingly and willingly signed. there is an expedited process which is known as quick court proceedings. the upshot of all these developments is there's been a growing gap between immigration judge removal orders and actual removals. in f.y. 2011, immigration judges issued 161,000 removal orders, but nearly 400,000 people were actually removed. some have rule of law concerns about the increasing informality of this process. others applaud this development. our finding is simply that these little known programs and authorities are being

substantially used at this point. third, as muz described, immigration and criminal enforcement have have been strongly linked. an example, roughly 30,000 of criminal alien removals in 2011 were for persons who committed immigration offenses for which they have been criminally prosecuteded. that's about 20%. we've also seen growing numbers of removals of persons with criminal convictions. some for quite serious crimes and some for misdemeanors. in 2012, nearly 55% of the persons removed had been convicted of a crime. in 2008, less than a third had been. our fourth finding is that government directed returns have decreased dramatically over the last decade. and the proportion of returns, the formal removals or deportations have reversed. what's a return? well, d.h.s. defines a return as a confirmed removal of an inadmirable or deportable alien

-- ined a missable or deportable alien. returns include what are known as voluntary departures but they include other things as well. and of course voluntary departures aren't really voluntary. returns may be overcounted in the official statistics for reasons described in the report. that said, they've certainly increased overall. there were 1.7 million returns in 2000. 323,000 in 2011. and far fewer returns than removals in 2011. rushes are normally granted -- returns are normally granted to mexican nationals and to a lesser extent canadian nationals. so you expect to see fewer given fewer decreases in illegal crossings. this trend is consistent with the notion of consequence enforcement, which doris mentioned. since the formal removal triggers a 10-year bar on readmission and return does not. life removals, detention numbers have increased dramatically since 1986,

particularly since 1996, i'd say. between 1995 and 2011, the average daily immigrant detention population rose from about 7,500 to about 33,300. i.c.e. now detains 430,000 persons in any given year. to give you a sense of the high, the bureau of prison holds more prisons per night than i.c.e. prisons but they hold fewer people a year than i.c.e. does. as with removals, the rising number of i.c.e. detainees, nearly 200,000 in 2011, had criminal records and these included both felonies and misdemeanors. in 2011, i.c.e. reported classifying only about 19% of detainees, however, in its highest risk category. i.c.e. also places substantial numbers of persons in alternative detention programs. these programs have various degrees of reporting

requirements and restrictions, including electronic monitoring and home and office visits. they produced extremely high appearance rates, as have passed supervised programs. plus, they meet the main purpose of detention, which is to ensure removal, and they cost far less than holding them in jails or prisons. i.c.e.'s f.y. 2013 budget request is for $2 million for detention operation but only $112 million for -- $2 billion for detention operation but a relatively modest, $112 million for alternatives to detention. reform of the detention system was a priority and has been of the obama administration. the guiding principle or insight has been that nobody in i.c.e. custody is actually serving a prison sentence, no matter what their backgrounds are. so the idea has been to transform a prison-like system into one in keeping with i.c.e.'s civil detention authorities and the civil detainees that it keeps. the challenges that d.h.s. is

facing and have faced are immense. in 2009 at the outset of this process, the. c.e. detention system consisted over 350 facilities, mostly contract facilities with states localities and for-profit prisons and most privately administered. so oversight has been a challenge. another challenge has been the broad mandatory detention rules and. c.e.'s sberpg of those rules that prevented those that would not be a flight risk. c.i.c.e. treats it as alternatives to detention, not to alternative forms of detention which would open up those programs to mandatory detainees. the final challenge has been the lack of experience and expertise of immigration officials and administering a program of this complexity diversity in size. unlike d.o.p., this isn't what d.h.s. was mostly built or structured to do. as part of its reform efforts,

they created a risk assessment tool to determine who's a flight risk or a danger to others and where to place individual detainees within the system, revised its immigration detention standards to make them more performance based and centralized management of its contract facilities and took steps to better monitor and ep force contract compliance. and also terminated dozens of detention contracts and renegotiated others and opened the first civil detention facility in kearns, texas. these have been very significant stems. although many groups have been raising concerns. the american bar association said it will still be governed for standards developed for prisoners in pretrial custody and not for civil detainees. and most detainees will be held in prison-like settings. finally, a couple quick points on the immigration prison

system. it operates out of d.o.j.'s immigration review that is 59 courts. it is slightly less than 260 judges and a budget of $300 million a year. compared to the budgets of the i.c.e. budget. the courts does not dispense perfect justice or afford full due process protections. no system does. one due process challenge has been that 85% of detainees and 50% of all cases and removal are unrepresented. and yet having counsel has been showed to substantially influence case outcomes as does the particular judge assigned to the case. while most removals now occur through less formal means, the court system handles a very large and a growing volume of cases is the result of d.h.s.'s buildup. but they haven't kept pace with the d.h.s. enforcement agencies

that feed into the system. the notices to appear for removal proceedings come from all three d.h.s. immigration agencies, i.c.e., c.b.p. and surprisingly uscis and large numbers as well. as a result, since 2006 backlogs of court cases have nearly doubled. as of november, 2012, there were 321,000 pending cases and these cases had been pending on average for 529 days. in 777 days for those cases where relief is ultimately granted. these kinds of delays still serve u.s. immigration and enforcement goals and punish those who are ultimately granted relief. yet, it's not clear how this problem will be fixed. immigration judges now have dockets of more than is,000 cases each.

judges -- 1,000 cases each. judgets have dockets that are far -- judges have dockets that are far larger. the laws have become more complicated over the years and the cases are also factually complex. there has been a d.o.j. hiring freeze in place since january of 2011, although eoir can backfill d.o.j. positions. on the other hand, we are seeing that filings of removal cases in court have decreased over the last year by 25%. the main point i wanted to make on courts is there is an imbalance of resource between enforcement and adjudication, although part are part and parcel of the same system. thank you. >> exactly five minutes. less than five minutes. and i thank you very much, don, for keeping it in time. >> ok. so try to put all of this

together, what do we see? we've given you a smattering of what it is that is in the report. there is a great deal more. when you look at this whole picture, when you examine the evidence, what you see is the emergeans of a complex, modernized cross-agency system organized around these six pillars, as we call them. it's been institutionalized through strong links with national security and national security imperatives as well as unprecedented resource investments. against that backdrop, against that 25-plus years of evolution that has brought us to this point, the recession came along and fundamentally altered the illegal immigration picture which this is attempting to solve. so, because of reduced job

demand in the united states and also coincidentally significant structural changes and conditions in mexico, the growth of unauthorized immigration in the united states is at a standstill. strengthened enforcement has become the additional element that is part of the combination of factors that explain that change. so it's fair to say, i think, that as a result of more than 25 years of investment and effort and immigration law enforcement bull worth is in place that responds to the rule of law and the enforcement first concerns that have driven congress and the nation's immigration debate for more than 25 years. particularly during the last decade. it's an imperfect system. it would benefit from recalibration in many areas,

but it is a sound lasting structure that ranks as the federal government's most expensively and costly law enforcement effort at the present time. nonetheless, enforcement standing alone is not proven sufficient as we've known to answer the broad challenges that both illegal and legal immigration pose for the country. we need enforceable laws that address inherent weaknesses in the enforcement system, and there is statutory change that could help to improve the law enforcement system. but we also need enforceable laws that rationalize immigration policy to align with the nation's broader growth needs. so what we're saying here is that a formidable enforcement machinery has been built. it can serve the national interest well and it provides a

platform from which to address the broader immigration challenges suited to the challenges and needs that immigration represents for the united states in the 21st century. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much, doris. and thanks to all of the speakers and the authors for this exceptionally comprehensive report. i'd like to open the floor to questions. meeze identify yourself -- please identify yourself, wait for the microphone to get to you and let's start. this gentleman over there, please identify yourself. >> i'm jim graham.

c.q. immigration. the question, given to the debate expected in a few weeks on capitol hill, i'm wondering whether expanded pathways to legal status for those here illegally, how would that change the cost calculus going forward? do you expect the growth in cost to continue or are there ways to slow it? >> who wants to take this? >> i think i would. i'll take it because i think that one of the things that we didn't talk about is the fiscal realities that are very much now part of the enforcement picture. i don't think there's any question, but that the funding of immigration agencies and enforcement functions is going to -- it's probably not going to decrease, but it is certainly likely to be on a straight line. so straight line funding, it leads to far more focus on

efficiency and effective programs, looking at ndou comes, measuring, assessing evaluation, etc. and that keeps you within the box of what is presently going on. so i think that's going to be happening in any event. but obviously if the congress decides on a much bigger redesign of immigration, there will be very strong cost implications, and there will be different ways that this enforcement machinery can be used to enforce the law but also to implement changes and relieve some of the pressure on some of the enforcement that presently is doing. >> if i may piggyback on this question and how this may weigh in because it's an extremely important question, i think doris is saying innesha alone

suggests we will have very large numbers. removal, etc., etc. the issue of resources alone, but the issue of change in methodologies, as we move to risk management methodologies, both in terms of interior enforcement and border enforcement, are we not likely to see perhaps less indiscriminant detention and deportation of people. and the formula which has already been shifted in favor of the bad actors that continues to go upwards. >> i think you see all it is that the enforcement agencies are expressing. you certainly see that in what the border patrol is talking about. for it's the next period. definitely i.c.e. in its effort to manage its deportation and

removal responsibilities has tried very hard to target and determine what are the high, you know, high priorities. but if, you know, referring to the question, if you -- let's just talk about the elephant in the room. if the congress decides on a legal status program of some kind, that removes an enormous number of people from the potentially removable population and even and underscores much more fully what you're see, demetri, those that can't qualify for that are likely to have a criminal background of some kind and that becomes very much a more conis he treated effort where interior -- conis he treated effort where sbeer -- concentrated effort where interior is concerned. >> it seems that broad reform could change a lot, depending on how it's structured, of course. what you see, of course, is a

lot of cases getting closed, administratively closed in court. i would say in the long term then the cases become more complex and they kind of -- may not return to the same level but they may be those tougher cases that doris and demetri have mentioned. >> more questions? please, ma'am. >> i'm wondering if you could explore to what extent you found that the oversight or accountability mechanism or this enforcement machinery has kept pace with the actual growth of the enforcement machinery beyond the judicial review but other oversight or other accountability mechanisms. my name is shana. i'm with the u.s. jesuit conference. >> thank you. >> i take it by that you mean inspector general reports,

internal audit, efforts, etc. you know, it's hard to say. in the first place, there have been such high rates of growth, high percentage rates of growth. when agencies grow at levels of 20%, 25%, 30% in a budget year, and that has happened in some of the years in the last decade, the accountability mechanisms can never keep up with that. so i think we can probably infer there has not been the kind of oversight. but in addition to that, it's also the case that these agencies are not terribly transparent. nor is tfs particularly transparent -- d.h.s. particularly transparent. so the degree there may be oversight taking place or not is not something that is easy

to determine from, you know, given the research that's available. there certainly are lots of g.a.o. reports, lots of inspector general reports. they are all detailed in our footnotes and what not, but there are unquestionably programs and particularly -- not particularly program results and use of funds and outcomes research, overall metrics, etc., that just hasn't been developed and need to be developed. >> thank you, doris. >> i just want to quick -- i agree with what doris said. given the pace at which these programs have been introduced, especially after 9/11, it's been very difficult for oversight to catch up with the growth, frankly. but i think despite that comment, i think you have to give credit to the government accountability office and the

office of inspector general that despite the time when congress was giving more money to these agencies for doing even what they asked for, that they have actually tried to provide some modicum of oversight. i mean, the 287-g program which we talked about did reform as a result of the government accountability office report. i.c.e. then did create a more uniformed men dumb of understanding which created a little bit more targeted -- memoranda of understanding which created a little bit of more targeted understanding. the office of inspector general looked at -- these are new programs. many of them -- the most important ones are really, really fresh, so we haven't seen any kind of result that we would normally see. >> i would just say on the detention system, there's been a good faith effort and

certainly oversight and accountability has been a focus, but the system is so broad, immense, disperse, disburse, that the word is really out on whether it's been successful or has been successful. and we are at an early stage of reform as well. >> the lady over there, can you raise your hand so i can put you down on my list? >> this question is primarily for don and it follows on what you were saying. in december, i.c.e. announced their new alternatives to detention policies. i know it's early and all you can do is speculate, but i wonder what you think the consequence -- what changes that might make in the patterns that you've been identifying for families? >> i don't think people understand the immensity of the alternative of detention

system. it's now about 18,000 people, last we heard, and the last statistics were from 2011. 18,000 people per night in the alternative system. in terms of kind of assuring people's appearances in court and assuring removals, it's been a highly successful system. 94% of appearance rates. as have past community supervision type programs. so these kinds of programs work and the funding for them, they're obviously way more cost-effective and also more humane. though very restrictive, some of them, with home visits. the big challenge now i think will be to create more of a community-based infrastructure of the kind of the institute type of programs and migration refugee systems and other n.g.o.'s have run over the years, but there are very significant programs and i think there is a good faith

commitment to the alternatives of detention. >> the lady in the back. >> karen. i wanted to ask a question about the growth in the enforcement leading to the need to identify obviously detention beds to hold the people that are the subject of the detention that don and others have been talking about. we haven't talked a lot this morning about the multiyear contracts with the state and local jails and in particular with the private prisons for the bed space. i wanted to ask if anybody wanted to comment on that piece of the structure and in the entrenchment of that in the enforcement policy going forward. >> well, you know, i would say that that's one of the major complicating factors of the detention reform effort is that you started with 350 separate

facilities. most of them states and localities, most of those privately managed. so that the -- and they were under contract for, you know, various period of times. so what the reform efforts have been about is renegotiating those contracts and trying to build in some accountability into those contracts. in fact, the numbers of -- number of contracts have decreased from something like 350 to 200, but this issue again of accountability and oversight is a real challenge for that system. >> thank you. ed >> thank you. the lady over here. >> a quick question. have you come across any findings that look at the intersections between law- enforcement and [indiscernible] particularly when we're talking

about women and children and parents and the deportation and detention system? i have one other question. when you are talking about the train having left the station, would you say there is room for pressure to continue to look at the policies, especially because they are more local rather than getting it increased to a federal mandatory system? >> let me take the first part. thee talking about intersection between immigration and the child welfare system. obviously, people who advocate on behalf of children and families have been making this argument for a long time.

i think you began to see the appreciation of them -- that in the prosecutorial discretion memos issued by ice in the last two or three years. increasingly, immigration officers are asked to look into factors like children who do not have anything else -- anyone to look after them, to be giving -- to be given discretion not to remove them from the united states. i understand there's an ongoing relationship between states, a child development agencies, and enforcement people to see whether there are appropriate ways children can be taken care of. if not, there can be special discussion not to remove a mother. the discussion was not to remove parents. i think that has gone into the mix of criteria for using

prosecutorial discretion in the last few years. it is one of the things we should be monitoring. we are all running out of time. we did not get the time to say this. what we have said is in no way an endorsement of all these policies. i hope you appreciate that. we just laid out what the government has done. these are highly controversial programs. no one denies that. there are huge human costs. there are huge costs in terms of the rule of law, due process, and many other constitutional issues. legal issues have raised these of through the conversation. we're not minimizing that. we hope we have done justice to those in our report. we hope you will read those parts of the report in the same spirit as you read the rest of the report.

particularly about these programs, when i said the train has left the station, it does not mean there is no debate about how to reform the system. it only means the debate should shift from trying to terminate the program on which a lot of political capital was spent to see how we would reform. there are a lot of good ideas about reforming the program. they issued their own report on the program. we asked for the termination of the model. the jazz has decided to terminate the task force model. as people are investigating these programs, improvements are also being talked about. many of them are getting some hearing.

>> really quickly, i do not think there are explicit findings between the intersection between enforcement and child welfare. we were concerned by things like the loss of custody and the severance of parental/child relationships as a result of removals and attentions. there is a short section on the family implications of removal that i commend to all of you. >> since i do not see a hand, i think i can ask the question. we have used the measures of effectiveness. i would like to ask the panel if they are seeing improvement toward more refined measures of effectiveness and success, where it is not about numbers, but it

is about trying to get to what is most important in terms of immigration enforcement. >> it is a broad topic. i think there is a growing appreciation within the agencies that they do need to know more about effectiveness outcomes as compared to measuring inputs. fundamentally, and you are talking about funding for personal, technology, growth. it is much less possible to assess actual effectiveness. probably the most important measure that matters right now is border enforcement and the degree to which it is effective. that is something dhhs has been

working on. they are struggling with the issues. they could probably be doing so more aggressively. we cannot fault them for making the effort. there is also going to be more pressure on them to be doing these kind of analyses because of the funding questions. when you get a straight line funding, you have to be -- even some decreases in funding. in the last year or so, there have been decreases for some programs. you have to be much more rigorous about what matters and how you do the work and what is you will continue to champion. the consequence enforcement of the border is a perfect example. a set of consequences are being used. some of them are very extensive. -- some of them are very expensive. some are quite inexpensive. if you except that, you need to

ask yourself which consequences best determines the terms. if that coincides with the most expensive, you have an argument for the most expensive. it might coincide with the less expensive. those of the questions that need to be asked that dhhs needs to be held accountable to, but the oversight needs to focus on it to refine the system to make the system produced a kind of results we have invested in. >> thank you very much. i will make one final observation and then we will close. one thing doris alluded to that the report is strong on is issues of david interoperability -- data interoperability. that has positives and negatives.

we have gotten to the point where a line officer anywhere can have real time access to all the information the federal agencies have available. soon, the dod enforcement agencies will have data added to that system. the liberating aspect is people at the border or even as we extend the border beyond will be able to make almost instant decisions about who should come in and who should not. i will leave the other concerns about the systems for another discussion. i would like to thank everyone for attending this event. i would like to thank my colleagues for their fine presentations. the office for a great report.

on behalf of all of them and the migration policy institute, thank you for coming out. thank you to the viewing audience. the report and our other work can be found at www.migrationpolicy.org. thank you very much and have a good day. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> supporters of the occupy movement discuss the state of the movement and its future. that is starting at 8:00 eastern. at 9:30, ethics in business and opportunities for women and youth. at 10:00, the google executive chairman of the impact of technology on society including health care energy.

tomorrow morning, president obama's announcement of his nominees to head the defense department and cia. we will hear from the former house intelligence committee ranking member. she will take your questions about the nomination of john brennan to head the central intelligence agency. we will look at the nomination of senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense with the foreign policy reuter. -- which the foreign policy writer. john talks about relations between the united states and afghanistan. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 eastern. >> i think cyber security remains a top priority because of the national-security implications. we saw that congress failed to reach an agreement in 2012. they remain far apart.

the industry is opposed to any server security standards. >> another big issue will be implementing the incentive options to create more spectrum. the fcc is in the midst of working on that. some of the hot-button issues are unlicensed spectrum that powers wi-fi. >> net neutrality could be a big issue. the d.c. circuit is considering the rise in challenge -- verizon challenge to the rules. there are indications they have been skeptical of the sec authority. >> a look at the major technology issues of 2013 with the reporters that cover them tonight at 8:00 eastern on c- span2.

we take a look at president obama's announcement to his new national security team. he and the nominees spoke from the east room of the white house earlier today. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states accompanied by leon panetta, chuck hagel, and john brennan. >> good afternoon. please have a seat. >> as president and commander in chief, my most solemn obligation is the security of the american people. we have met that responsibility. by ending the war in iraq, a transition to afghanistan, and decimating the al qaeda core, and taking out osama bin laden. by disrupting terrorist plots,

saving countless american lives. among an outstanding team, i am especially grateful to leon panetta who has led the cia and our military. after nearly five decades of service, you have more than earned the right to return to civilian life. i have much more to say about his distinguished service in the days ahead. today i want to convey the eternal gratitude. the entire nation. thank you so much. i also want to thank michael who has earned the admiration of all of us who have worked with them across the government and here in the white house. in moments of transition he has guided the cia with a steady hand as acting director not once but twice. he is a consummate professional.

everybody who works with him across agencies consider some -- considers him truly to be one of our most outstanding national security team members. on behalf of all of us, thank you for your continued service. the work of protecting our nation is never done. we still have got much to do. ending the war in afghanistan and caring for those who have borne the battle. preparing for the full range of threats from the unconventional to the conventional, including things like cyber security. within our military, continuing to ensure our men and women can serve the country they love no matter who they love. to help meet the challenges of our times, i am proud to announce my choice for the two

key members of national security. chuck hagel for secretary of defense, john brennan is director of the cia. chuck hagel is a leader our troops deserve. he is an american patriot. enlisted in the army and volunteered for vietnam. he served with honor alongside his own brother. when he was hit by shrapnel his brother saved him. when his brother was injured by a mine, he risked his life to pull him to safety. he bears the scars from battles but in our name. -- fought in our name. this would be historic. he would be the first person of enlisted rank to serve as the secretary of defense. one of the few secretaries to

have been wounded in war. the first vietnam veteran to lead the department. chuck hagel will give our troops that character and strength. they see one of their own. he is a champion and our troops and military family. as a leader at the va, he fought to give our veterans the benefits they deserve. as the head of the uso, he devoted himself to caring for our troops. he helped to lead the fight for the post-9/11 gi bill. his helping today's returning heroes get their education. he knows our armed forces collect and depend on good intelligence. he recognizes american leadership is indispensable in a dangerous world. i saw this in our travels

together across the middle east. he understands america stands strongest when we stand with allies. as a successful businessman, he also knows we have to make tough fiscal choices wisely guided by strategy and keep our military the strongest fighting force the world has ever known. maybe most importantly, he understands sending young americans to fight and bleed in the dirt is something we only do when absolutely necessary. my frame of reference, he has said, is geared toward the guy at the bottom doing the fighting and dying. with chuck, our troops will always know secretary hagel

will be there for you. finally, he represents the bipartisanship we need more of in washington. he has earned the respect of national security and military leaders, republicans and democrats, including me. in the senate, i came to admire his courage and judgment, his willingness to speak his mind even if it was not popular and even if it defied conventional wisdom. that is exactly the wisdom of one on a national security team. the recognition that when it comes to the defense of our country, we are not democrats or republicans. we are americans. each of us has a responsibility, he has said, not to be guided by the interests of our party or president, but by the interests of our country. i think you and your wife for agreeing to serve once more.

while lamb on the subject of patriots, let me say a few words about john brennan. the men and women of the cia will have leadership with one of our most skilled and respected intelligence professionals. not to mention the unique combination of smarts and strength that he claims comes from growing up in new jersey. a 25-year veteran of the ca, he knows what our national security demands. intelligence that provides policymakers with the fox. strong analytic insights and a keen understanding of a dynamic world. given his extensive experience and travels which include traveling through the arabian peninsula where he can with tribesmen in the desert, john has an invaluable perspective on

the forces of history and economics, the desire for human dignity driving so much of the changes in today's world. having held senior management, analytic, and operational positions at the agency, he is committed to investing in the range of capabilities we need, technical and human. he literally built and led the national counter-terrorism center. he knows the risks our professionals face every day. john has lost colleagues and friends, heroes whose stars grace that wall. as my adviser, and he has developed and overseeing our comprehensive counterterrorism strategy, a collective effort across the government including law enforcement agencies. think about the results.

more al qaeda leaders and commanders removed from the battlefield than anytime since none of of an -- since 9/11. their communications are under enormous strain. that makes it harder to plan and carry out attacks against our homeland. our entire team will remain relentlessly against al qaeda and its affiliates. all of this work, in all this has been careless. people in the white house work hard. john is legendary even in the white house for working hard. he is one of the hardest working public servants i have ever seen. i am not sure he has slipped in four years. -- i am not sure he has slept in four years.

when i was on martha's vineyard, john came into the press briefing. it was the summer, in august. he was in a suit and tie. one of the reporters asked if he ever got downtime. he said, i do not do downtime. [laughter] he is not even smiling now. [laughter] there is another reason to trust him so much. that is because of his integrity and commitment to the values that define us as americans. he has worked to imbed our efforts in a strong legal framework. he understands we are a nation of laws. in moments of debate and decision, he asks the tough questions. he insists on high and rigorous standards. time and again, he has spoken to the american people about our counter-terrorism policies because he recognizes we have a responsibility to be as open

interest. as possible. you have been one of my closest advisers and a great friend. i am deeply grateful for your extraordinary service, even more grateful for kathy's willingness to put up with you and grateful to both of you for being willing to take the position. today i consider to the men and women of the ca that you will have one of your own, a leader who knows you and cares for you deeply and will fight for your every day. you will have a leader that has my complete confidence. the work of defending our nation is never done. my no. 1 criterion in making these decisions was simple. who is going to do the best job in securing america? these two leaders have dedicated their lives to protecting our country. i am confident they will do an outstanding job. i urge the senate to confirm

them as soon as possible so we can keep our nation secure and the american people safe. congratulations. of want to invite each of these leaders on stage to say a few words starting with mr. leon panetta. >> let me express my deepest gratitude to the president for giving the honor of serving in your administration. these last four years as director of the cia and secretary of defense, i have been extremely proud to be part of your national security team, mr. president, and proud of what it has accomplished in your first term. looking ahead to the second

term, i want to commend president obama on his decision to nominate chuck hagel has the next secretary of defense. let me also add as the former director of the cia, to commend the president for his choice of john brennan. i have had the opportunity to work with john on counter- terrorism issues the last four years. he knows the cia. he will be a strong leader of that great intelligence agency. i have also known chuck a long time as well. i had the opportunity to work with him closely, particularly in his capacity as the chairman of the president's intelligence advisory board. i greatly appreciate the work he has done to strengthen our intelligence enterprises. it has been extremely important to our ability to improve our intelligence capabilities.

as secretary of defense, i also benefited from his work when he served on our defense policy board. chuck hagel is a patriot. he is a decorated combat veteran. he is a dedicated public servant. i believe his experience, judgment, and deep understanding of security issues facing this country make him the right choice to be secretary of defense. as for me, after close to 50 years of serving the american people, i began in 1964 when i served as a first lieutenant in the united states army. then in both the legislative and executive branch positions in washington. the time has come for me to return to my wife and our three sons and their families, our six grandchildren, and my walnut

farm. dealing with a different set of nuts. [laughter] i want to be played tha -- i want to thank my family for giving me the fullest measure of support throughout my long career in public service. i will leave washington with a deep sense of pride in what we have accomplished during these last four years been on the president's national security team. as director of the cia and secretary of defense, i have always believed our fundamental mission is to keep america safe and secure. because of the outstanding dedication of our intelligence and military professionals, america is safer and more secure than it was four years ago.

we have reached a turning point after more than a decade of war. as we reach that turning point, we have developed a new defense strategy for the 21st century. we have decimated al qaeda's leadership. we have weakened their efforts to attack this country. we will bring the war in afghanistan to an honorable conclusion. we have opened up opportunities for all americans to serve in our military. we continue to strongly support our forces, their families, and our wounded warriors. these are some of the achievements i am proud of. let me close by expressing my profound gratitude to the outstanding team of military and civilian staff and leaders i have had the honor to serve with at the department of defense and

at the white house. in particular, let me deeply thank the outstanding men and women in uniform who have had the privilege to serve and lead. those who put the lines on the line every day on distant battlefields for this country. their sacrifices teach us freedom is not free. a strong democracy depends on a strong defense. you can also not have a strong and stable defense without a strong and stable democracy. as we continue to confront strategic challenges and fiscal austerity, my hope for the future is that the sense of duty our service members and their families exhibit every day inspires the leaders of this nation to have the courage to do what is right, to achieve the american dream, and give our children a better life, and

build a more secure future. thank you mr. president. i am honored by your trust and confidence in me and not unmindful of the immense responsibilities that go with it. i want to acknowledge my wife, daughter and our son, who is in chicago today, we hope, back attending his first day of classes at depaul university. thank you for extraordinary service to the country over so many years and in so many capacities. you are one of the premiere public servants at our time. to follow you at the department of the defense will be a

challenging test. but i will try to live up to the standards you, bob gates and others have set for the job in this nation. let me express my deep appreciation to my friend, john brennan and to also acknowledge the president's confidence and trust in john brennan. thank you, john, for your service. to mike, who i have got tone know over the years. not just serving on the senate intelligence committee but also the president noted coherring the -- co-chairing the president's advisory board. i am grateful for this opportunity serve our country again. especially the men and women and their families. these are people that give so

much to this nation every day with such dignity and selflessness. this is particularly important at a time we complete our mission in afghanistan and support the troops and military families that sacrificed so much over more than a decade of war. i am grateful for an opportunity to help to continue to strengthen our country and our country's alliances and advance global freedom, decencies and humanity as we help to build a better world for all of mankind. i will do my best for our country, for those that i represent at the pentagon and for all of our citizens. mr. president i will always give you my honest and most informed council. >> mr. president, thank you for

your very kind remarks. thank you for the trust that you placed in me. i have had the honor of aning and working with john brennan for the last 20 years. john is an intelligence professional with deep experience in our business, a public servant with extraordinary dedication. and a man of deep integrity. the senate confirmation, i know that he will be an outstanding director of the central intelligence agency. as the president noted john started his career at c.i.a. and spent nearly a quarter of a century. this is a homecoming for john. john, on behalf of the talented

and dedicated men and women of c.i.a. it is my deep honor to say welcome home. >> it is a tremendous honor to be nominated to be the director of the central intelligence agency. the women and men of the c.i.a. are among the most dedicated, courage us, selfless and hard working individuals that have ever served this country at great personal risk and sacrifice they made countless invaluable contributions to our national security and to the safety and the security of all-americans. most times the successes will never be known outside the hallowed halls of langley and the oval office. leading the agency in which i served for 25 years would be the greatest privilege and greatest responsibility of my professional life. mr. president i want to thank

you for your confidence in me and even more for your confidence and constant support to the c.i.a. and to those that serve in the intelligence community. they need and they deserve the support of all of their fellow americans, especially at a time of tremendous national security challenges. if confirmed as director i will make it my mission to ensure the c.i.a. keeps our nation safe and that its work always reflects the liberties, freedoms and values that we hold so dear. i am especially proud to stand here today with such patriots. it was a tremendous honor to serve with leon over the last four years and look for the opportunity to serve with another great patriots, chuck

hagel and i am privileged to stand here with michael morel who epitomizes what it means to be an intelligence professional. michael's leadership at the c.i.a. as well as his 2-year career has been nothing short of exempt larry. i also look forward to working with congress as the national security rests on the ability of the executive and legislative branches of the government to work as a team. the intelligence profession oftentimes demands secrecyy it is critically important there be a full and open discourse on intelligence matters with the appropriate elected representatives of the american people. i consider myself neither a republican or democrat i forward to working with both closely. to my wife, kathy and children

kyle, jacqueline and kelly and my parents in new jersey. a shout out. my brother, tom. i couldn't be here without their love, understanding, patience and support and there is no way i can repay that but to say i think i will need it for a little bit longer. mr. president, i am deeply grateful for this opportunity. it will be bittersweet to leave my close colleagues and friends here at the white house. but to work with and respect so deeply over the last few years. if confirmed by the senate i would consider it to be the honor of my life. >> these are four outstanding individuals. we are grateful to all of them.

i want in particular to thank mike morel and leon for their extraordinary service. i just want to repeat that the senate will act on these confirmations promptly. when it comes to national security we don't like to leave a lot of gaps between the time that one set of leaders transitions out and another transitions in. we need to get moving quickly. one of the reasons that tiam so confident that chuck hagel will be an outstanding secretary of defense and john brennan will be an outstanding director of the central intelligence agency is that they understand that we are only successful because of the folks up and down the line in these institutions. folks on the ground. folks putting their lives at

risk for us. oftentimes they are greatly removed from washington and from politics. to have those that have been in the field, been in the heat of battle, who understand the consequences and the decisions that we make and how it has an impact and ramifications for everybody who actually has to execute the national security strategies. it will provide me the kinds of insight they need in making very difficult decisions and also mean these folks will be looking out for the people that work for them and that is something that i think in these leadership positions are absolutely critical. i am looking forward to working with the two gentleman there. thank you very much everybody.

>> john brennan nominated to be the director of the c.i.a. he held a deputy position there from 2000 1-2003 and has been there nearly 25 years and former nebraska senator, chuck hagel nominated to head up the pentagon. he was awarded two purple hearts for his service. senator from 1997-2009 and most recently shared the atlantic council a defense policy think

tank. john mccain, a vietnam veteran issued a statement about the president's choice for a secretary of defense saying he congratulates senator hagel on the nomination but has concerns about positions he has taken on national security in recent years and charles schumer released a statement saying chuck hagel is a former colleague and patriots with a decorated service record and earned the right to a full and fair process in the senate. >> we saw congress failed to reach an agreement on cyber security in 2012. they remain far apart.

the industry is opposed to any cyber security standard. >> i think another big issue will be implementing the incentive option so the fcc has their sleeves rolled up. some of the hot button issues on that are unlicensed spectrum. that powers wifi and the other amazing devices. >> net neutrality could be a big issue. there are indications on similar issues in the past that the d.c. circuit has been skeptical of the fcc's authority. >> a look at the major issues of 2013 with the reporters that cover them tonight on "the communicators". >> i think that

collectivization of the minds of america's founding fathers is particularly dangerous because they were not an ecletic unit. presenting them as such tends to dramatically oversimplify the politics of the founding generation and comes to be used as a big battering ram to beat people over the head with. >> michael austin on what he calls the deep historical flaws by conservative commentators. sharing his views with david fontanna. >> in primetime here on c-span

tonight supporters of the occupy movement discuss its future. 9:30 the c.e.o. -- that all starts tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. jay carney addressed a number of issues in the white house briefing today including president obama's announcement that he was nominating chuck hagel to be secretary of defense.

>> i am not sure that there are many of you who did. we will now take questions. >> does the president feel like hagel needs to address his past comments on israel and iran before he can be confirmed or are those comments irrelevant to this process? >> well, today the president announced his nominees for secretary of defense and the director of the central intelligence agency and made broad comments about why the

men he nominated are the right people for the jobs. there will be a process in each case where the senate reviews the nominees. the president asks the senate to move quickly because these positions are very important for the national security. i know senator hagel and john brennan look forwarded to that process and to fair hearings in both cases. it is a routine part of the exercise that nominees are asked about views on various issues. on the matters you just raised senator hagel has been a stanch supporter of israel. of the israeli-american relationship and the united states' support for israel's security throughout his career. he has always been, as

demonstrated by his record, a supporter of the broad sanctions regime that this president has put into place against iran. a sanctions regime that is unprecedented and as recently as last spring senator hagel wrote about favorably and urged washington as a whole to continue. i am sure senator hagel looks forward to discussing his record. >> do you think it is important that hagel clarify some of the statements that he made? asking him to clarify what he meant? >> i think the process will allow for what it always does. a review by the senate. i think senator hagel's record on those issues and so many others demonstrate that he is in sync with the president's policies and on the first issue, let's be clear,

president balm has, in his administration overseen the closest, most substantial support for israel's defense of any administration in history. a judgment not just made by me or others, it is a judgment that has been made by and expressed by the prime minister and the defense minister. and that is a policy that will continue under president obama with all of the members of his national security team. >> the president also said that with national security in particular it is important -- given all of the fiscal issues coming up and all of the deadlines coming up does the president feel it is important not to have the staff when --

>> i have no other announcements to make or updates to give with regards to personnel. i am sure that when the president nominates a successor to the secretary quite near he will look forward to speedy consideration by the senate but i don't have the timetable on that. >> i have no guide toons give out timing. it is important for any president to have time and space to consider his important decisions. when he is ready to make an announcement, he will. >> the fiscal cliff deal included a package of tax breaks for businesses worth $54 billion. republicans are saying that the president insisted on these. i am wondering why given all of the difficulty making the final deal the president insisted on

receiving these business tax breaks. >> you are assuming what you have been told is correct. it would strain everyone in the room to jest that republicans did not support or want tax credits for business. that would turn washington on its head and that is not what happened. the president supported giving certainty to american businesses and consumers by extending the package this summer, or summer of 2012 passed 19-5. more than 90% of the cost is associated with long-standing provisions in the tax code with clear policy for business or individual including the production tax credit supporting clean energy jobs. if this support would have been allowed to expire because it was discussed during the

campaign as many as 37,000 clean energy jobs could have been lost. mortgage debt relief. the list goes on. bonus depreciation. going back to the first point this package of tax extenders supported on a bipartisan basis by the senate finance committee, the president supported it but you would have to suspend the belief to accept the premise that the republicans did not. >> is there a moment the president sat down with senator hague and he will offered him the job and had a heart to heart about what direction he would like to see the pentagon move in? >> the president offered senator hagel the job by phone i believe over the weekend. but the fact is that they have a long relationship dating back to their service together in the united states senate.

president mentioned today they traveled today abroad. senator hagel after he left the senate was president of the -- they have had an ongoing conversation about the nation's national security needs and the president's policies in the last four years which i think is clear that senator hagel believes have been the right policy and that he looks forward to helping to implement, if he is confirmed by the senate. >> what gave the president confidence that he could run it. >> among the items on senator hagel's rather unique resume is the in fact he was c.e.o. and a successful one.

that is one of the many attributes he brings to running an institution as large as the defense department. and that is part of a record that is quite remarkable. here is someone that fought and bled for his country, who enlisted as a volunteer to serve and fight in vietnam. who was awarded the purple heart twice. who then served in the v.a. and has head of u.s.o. and as a united states senator. since then as an advisor to the president's intelligence matters. this is a remarkable career of service in which all of senator hagel's many talents are reflected and that he will bring those to the job. >> did anything out there trouble the president enough where he reinterviewed senator hagel? >> i am not going to go through

the process. >> did he make senator hagel answer? >> i will not go through the process that the president uses to select nominees except that he does so in a very deliberate fashion. he looks for the best people in the jobs in the national security arena and around the nation. he has known senator hagel for a long time and worked directly with him in the senate and as president. the president knows his record and senator hagel's commitment and knows he will be an excellent secretary of defense who will look out as the president said for all those who served as we did, who

implement the policies and decisions made here in washington often so far removed from the battlefield. he has great confidence that senator hagel will be an excellent director of defense. >> it was thought to be there would be -- he wasn't ready to answer questions about his role in being a part of the enhanced interrogation technique. >> mr. brennan wrote a letter in which he made it clear that he opposed enhanced interrogation techniques and john brennan has served as the president's chief counterterrorism advisor. it is this president that banned torture as one of his first acts in office and implemented that policy and then the others with the

remarkably capable assistance of john brennan. >> senator mcconnell over the weekend said the tax issue is now done. >> no. we believe that any further deficit reduction of which there must be in the president's view must be pursued with the same balanced approach the president insisted on up until now. i am not go to itemize how it breaks down. but the fact is that it is part of the $4 trillion package the president put forward. you would have to breakdown the numbers and look at it. one of the things you heard the president of the united states say on new year's day, fiscal cliff challenge was resolved is

that the agreement enshrined the principles that we must have balance as we move forward in our deficit reduction in the spending cuts part of the fiscal cliff deal they were paid for in a balanced way with roughly 50% spending cuts and 50% revenue. that is an approach the president believes is very important to continue. you know when members of congress suggest they are not part of the equation it does not make a lot of sense. i stood here and discussed the various proposals going back and forth when the president was in negotiations with the speaker, a big deal. one that would address our long-term fiscal challenges through broader deficit reduction.

the speaker put on the claim what he claimed was a revenue made up entirely of the closeure of loopholes and the capping of deductions, tax reform. either that was good policy they no longer support or republicans believe what the president does. through tax reform we can achieve i would ask what about that $800 billion proposal that was ok then but not now. republicans said they believed we need to reform the tax code and that there are loopholes crying out to be closed that no longer serve the country fthey ever did. there are ways to cap deductions and reforming our tax code that can produce more revenue in a fairway that does not burden the middle class and ises the wealthiest to pay more. >> since you talked about the

conversation >> the last stage the president put on the table, does that mean the president is looking for ballpark more in the tax revenue? >> i would prefer not to get into the norkses with how we eliminate the sequester, which the president is interested in doing. but it is clear from the proposal the president put forward dating back to his submission to the super committee through his budget proposal and through negotiations what his principles are and where he believes we can reform the tax code and produce more revenue and the balance we need to inform us as we make the spending cuts necessary. we know that balance is the way

to go here. it is the path the public supports. it is inconceivable to the president and to many of thought republicans want to, as we approach the coming months have as a basic position what we really need to do is slash benefits for seniors without asking the wealth tow do any more. i don't think that is a position plausible to take and certainly not a position the president supports. you are getting way ahead of any process that is in place now. for some reason it was viable a few weeks ago to find $800

billion in revenue try closing loopholes and capping deduction presumably not good for the economy. the president believes tax reform can and should produce more revenue. balance is essential as we achieve further revenue deduction. >> the president believes that when the senate considers the totality of senator hagel's career that they will confirm him as the next secretary of defense. the senator's record, both in

uniform and in the private sector and as a united states senator and advisor on intelligence matters to the president. i know senator hagel looks ford discussing that record with the senate. you know i will not bore you and tie up your time by reading the number of endorsements that senator hagel's nomination has received. but they are numerous and we expect that more will come. >> is it your position when hagel was skeptical of sanctions on iran, called for direct negotiations with hezbollah. is that this and this is now not relevant? >> those are slightly skewed by the current debate. on sanctions, senator hagel supported an aggressive sanction against iran and recently as last year wrote about the need to continue to

isolate and pressure iran through sanctions. there is the approach president obama has taken which has been vastly more effective and multilateral in nature. then there are those that represent the whole, which they do not. the fact is senator hague pel supports a sanction regime against iran and as secretary of defense he will aggressive implement the president's policy, including his very aggressive approach to sanctioning iran for failure to meet the international obligations with regards to their nuclear program. senator hagel's record is on all of these, i am sure he will be asked a lot of questions about his views on policy.

fundamentally it is fortunate remember that members of this president's national security team like members of his broader team are hired and do the work of implementing the president's policies. when it comes to israel, middle east, hezbollah, iran, the president's policy are very clear. senator hagel will as secretary of defense carry out the policies just as john brennan will as director of the c.i.a. and as other members of the president's team have and will. secretary gates. a few moments ago expressed his admiration for senator hagel and the desire that senator hagel will be confirmed. >> what do you make of senator graham's that the nomination is an in your face nomination

suggesting an in your face second term. >> i am not getting into a rebuttal of every stray comment made by members of congress. senator hagel's record is exemplary. he fought for his community uniform as an enlisted member in vietnam, served his country in the united states senate. it is rather remarkable to hear some of the critics out there question senator hagel and whether or not he should have the position when you look back at what the same members of the senate said in praise of senator hagel a few years ago. he is the same man today. the same patriots today. the same intellect today that he was then. we agree with senator mccain

that said not too many years ago that chuck hagel would be an excellent secretary of state. president believes he will be an excellent secretary of defense. >> the vice president with what we are to understand be a broad approach with the issue of gun violence. senator mccolonel said he doesn't want to talk about anything other than fiscal matters for the next few years. i'm sorry. i meant months. >> i think the president will move forward with his agenda in a timely fashion including the work biden is doing on the effort to examine measures that we can take to address the problem of gun violence in this

country. many americans would disagree with the idea in the wake of what happened in newtown, connecticut that we should put off any action on the issue of gun violence. i think that would be met with surprise by the vast majority of the american people that don't watch the sunday shows. >> a broad effort as opposed -- >> i can cite the president on several occasions that he talked about the fact that issues that address access to guns, including legislation like the assault weapons ban or legislation that would ban high capacity gun clips or legislation closing the many loopholes in the background check system supports congressional action right away. they are only part of the problem and they only address

part of the problem. he agrees issues of mental health are part of this problem and need to be addressed by the effort president biden has undertaken. >> it prompted the president to suggest that they were actually criticizing him. does he believe the criticism is more aimed at him than it is senator hagel? >> well, i will reject the temptation to compare one to the other. i will simply say that the president firmly believes, as you heard him just moments ago say that senator hagel will make, if confirmed, an excellent secretary of defense.

it is unique. the president says senator hagel would be the first vietnam veteran to run the defense department, the first enlisted person to run the defense department. with that we would bring a keen understanding and appreciation of the men and women that serve the armed forces. he believes that senator hagel's record will convince the senate to confirm him as the next secretary of defense. does the president intoned have conversations directly with the speaker and to negotiate with him directly? >> the president believes as

part of the system of government the executive branch engages and negotiates with the legislative branch and that will continue on a range of issues. the president as you said is very open to compromise on a range of issues when it comes to addressing our fiscal challenges and putting in policies that help the economy grow and ton to create jobs. he will not negotiate over congress' responsibility to pay the bills that congress has incurred. as you know as a veteran reporter here in washington a president cannot by himself or herself spend a single dollar. congress passes the laws. congress racks up the bills. congress must pay the bills. it is simply inappropriate and extremely dangerous to suggest

that in the name of a political agenda we would default for example on our obligations to pay the bills. that is congress' responsibility and the president won't negotiate over congress' responsibility to pay their bills. >> the lights are bright. they reflect. >> i remind my son of that. thank you for that. >> the speaker apparently said last week that he does not want to negotiate directly with the president anymore. do you think that is appropriate? what is the president's response? >> you know, this is not

personal. it is about putting in place the policies that are best for the country. there is no question that president obama in the course of his four years in office learned a great deal about how to work with congress and how to enlist public support on behalf of policies that are very important to the lives of every day americans across the country. as we have discussed in recent months the president will continue to make the case to the american people for the policies that he believes are right and even as he works with and negotiates with congress on matters of legislative importance. you know i am not sure that i only bhrd this indirectly. i didn't have the conversation directly with the speaker or even read the article. but it is incumbent upon the leaders in washington to ton work together to get the

necessary work done and advance the economy, continue to create jobs and ensure we are doing everything possible to make america safe. >> will he try to talk to the speaker? >> i think the distinction i am making here is that he is, eager to and willing to compromise in order to achieve policies that advance our economic growth and help to create jobs and bring down our deficit in a responsible and balanced way. he will continue to do that. we have two more months to deal with the so called sequester. that is something the president will be addressing. what he will not do is negotiate with congress over congress' sole responsibility to pay the bills congress has

already incurred. nobody forced to congress to get the bills they incurred. you know simply because we are not getting what we want. the president will not participate in that. i would remind you of the damage damaged to the economy by the approach that house republicans took on this matter in the summer of 2011 as a result of their flirtation with default, the stock market plummeted. the dow fell 7% or almost 900 points in late july. united states was downgraded. the dow fell another 10% after the s&p 500 downgraded the united states. consumer confidence plummeted

to the lowest point since 2008. widespread uncertainty for middle class and families were caused and august 2011 was the lowest of any month in our economic recovery. that is what you get when you play games with the full faith and credit of the united states. we don't expect and hope the congress does not engage in this type of action again. >> senator hagel's first interview today he said he was hanging out there in no man's land unable to respond to chargers and falsehoods. i wonder if you can walk through which groups outside the senate have reached out in hopes of smoothing this nomination? >> well, i appreciate the opportunity, but i will pass on

it. the broadly speaking white house they are reaching out to a number of groups and individuals with regards to this nomination and others and will continue to do so in making the case for these individuals. as far as the initial question it is an unfortunate reality that has been the norm here in washington. even when names are bantied about in the press the process begins when critics jump all over them. you know that is just one of the reasons why washington has become a more fractious place. the president believes the senate will confirm both senator hague and he will john brennan to those positions. in each case the president said

they are uniquely qualified individuals to the offices that they will hold if confirmed. i will simply say that we have conversations with individuals all the time and groups about policy proposals and nominees for the higher office but i don't have anything specific to report to you and there is nothing unusual about that process. >> i am wondering how important it is to president obama to have women in prominent roles in his new cabinet. >> the president does believe diversity is very important. he also believes that picking the absolute right person for each job is very important. the nominees he announced today represent that principle he

believes senator hagel and john brennan are the right people for the jobs which they have been nominated. as part of this, we have secretary clinton, who after four years is leaving office. the homeland security secretary, we have ambassador susan rice indicating she is staying on in new york as the u.s. representative to the united nations. and there are you know, obviously other remarkably capable women in positions of high office in this administration and will continue to be. >> some of them, in terms of replacing secretary clinton leaving do you think -- >> i think any suggestion that secretary clinton was chosen because of her gender would be

rejected by senator clinton and others. you know everyone that is secretaried in finding the very best people for every job. that is what he has done today and that is what he will continue to do. you know in that process he insists on diversity. on the list that he considers for the job because he believes that in casting a broader net you increase the excellence of the pool. in the end he will make the choice that he believes is best for the united states, -- >> when will we hear from the biden group? rir think the president indicated that he wants the effort led by vice president biden to report to him with dispatch but i don't have a timeline to give you. the president has already urged

congress when they come back to work to take up initiatives and legislation to ban assault weapons, to ban high capacity magazines and to improve our background check system because they do have loopholes, the so called gun show loophole is a problem. he thinks congress can and should address it. as for the other aspects i will leave it to him to announce. >> when is the absolute last time that he wants the recommendation, there have been some suggestions there will be listening sessions.

i would ask to you stay tuned. >> what about for people to weigh in. >> i don't have anymore information for you. i know the vice president is leading a process that has been reported in conversations with many stakeholders who have a keen interest in this issue. that will continue to be the case. >> i don't have a shurpa for you. it is nominated with the supreme court nominees. i don't know that there are much beings in this case. senator hagel and mr. brennan will be assisted as they go through the process of confirmation in the senate by a number of people but i do not have individuals to provide to you.

>> do you have the date as soon as they return? >> the president, as you heard him earlier today say, hopes the senate will take up these nominations as well as the nomination of senator kerry for secretary of state as soon as possible because of the importance of filling the positions quickly. the importance to the national security. but i don't have a date certain for you and we defer to the relative committees. >> you talked about when the president believes in diversity. he at casts a broad net looking for candidates to serve. you know during the campaign mitt romney was ridiculed for saying he wanted a binder full of women to make decisions. what do you mean? did he interview people to make sure that he is really hearing from women and other minorities

for this job and other jobs or does he insist on other ways to find quality candidates? >> without addressing any specific nomination process i would say the answer is yes. he speaks with numerous candidates. he selects the office holders, men and women that he believes are the right individuals for the job to which they have been appointed. you know, that continues to be his process. it is not uniform. it is a broad sentiment. he believes the country is served by a process that does seek out the diverse talent in this country for different positions.

>> does this prove that the president's second term agenda will be focused with a priority on national security and foreign policy? >> it proves that the president, as he said today, considers the security of the united states and the american people his highest priority and responsibility. that is why he has asked individuals of such talent and records of service as john brennan and senator kerand he senator hagel to serve in the positions that they have been nominated for. broadly speaking, as he has said repeatedly, his policy priority, there are many. but his top priority continues to be having our economy grow, having it create jobs, giving

security to the middle east and building a foundation for future growth allowing for future generations to enjoy the opportunity and promise of america that previous generations, including the president's own, have enjoyed. but there is no question that his primary responsibility is the safety and security of the american people. that is the responsibility of every president. it is one this president takes very seriously. >> the policy center issued a report today saying the government would run out of money prior to what we talked about, as early as february

15th. i wonder if the administration wants to ask the i.r.s. to postpone refunds for people or were you thinking about issuing an order about which creditors would be paid first? >> the treasure department has been putting out information like that including a letter at the end of the year about the estimates as to when the debt ceiling would be reached and to the measures the treasure department has in the past and is now taking with regards to that matter. but i would refer you for the questions you asked to the treasure department. >> at the risk of sounding naiive, how does that work practicically? leaders of congress normally don't have the votes to raise the ceiling. just say i am not going to talk about that? >> well, the president believes members of congress were elected to serve and as one of their essential

responsibilities, to ensure that they do no harm in congress to this economy and to the livelihoods of average americans. flirting with default or even worse, allowing default would be a violation of those primary responsibilities. george, i can't be more clear. these are bills that congress racked up. if congress says they shouldn't be paying these bills or there should be less spending and borrowing they should have passed different legislation that appropriated funds. it is not the president's responsibility to pass legislation to raise the debt ceiling, it is congress' responsibility. he will not engage in a negotiation with congress that as advocates have described as a hostage situation that would

result as it did in the summer of 2011 harming greatly this economy and businesses and great harm to average americans. so, it is just not the right thing to do. i think that if we were to travel down the road for any length of time, a great deal of unionimity behind the idea that it is a terrible proposition to flirt or allow default. let me remind you if the position of republicans in congress will be your choice america is between default and therefore economic chaos on the one hand or voucherizing medicare or slashing benefits for seniors. american people will say no. this is not the right way to do things in this country. you have to heed to your responsibilities here including paying for the bill that you racked up.

this hases to do with spending that has already been incurred. it is congress' responsibilities to pay their bills. george, when you get a credit card bill, you pay it. if you don't you get penalized. in the case of not paying your bills in the united states of america, the penalty is both real in financial terms and severe for the economy and for the american people. president won't negotiate with congress over congress' responsibility to pay their own bills. thank you all. -- it is often forgotten by republican leaders that this is the case, that some of the republican leaders in office now that claim as their objective primary debt objective presides over enormous budget busting in the previous administration often forgotten that the only

president in our times here, in washington to have balanced the budget it was president bill clinton. and he passed to his successor surplus. it was actions taken by congress in the previous decade and the administration in office at the time that turned them into the largest deficit of the lifetime at the time. thank you. >> god bless today's white house briefing with press secretary -- that was today's white house briefing with press secretary. we will now show you that personnel announcement that took place earlier today at the white house. the president urging the senate

to act quickly on the two confirmations. we will also hear remarks from leon panetta and acting cia director. this is half an hour. >> the president of the united states. >> as president and commander in chief, my most solemn obligation is the security of the american people. we have met that responsibility. by ending the war in iraq, a transition to afghanistan, and decimating the al qaeda core, and taking out osama bin laden. by disrupting terrorist plots, saving countless american lives.

among an outstanding team, i am especially grateful to leon panetta who has lead the cia and our military. you have more than earned the right to return to civilian life. i have much more to say about his distinguished service in the days ahead. today i want to convey the eternal gratitude. thank you so much. i also want to thank michael, who has earned the admiration of all of us who have worked with them across the government and here in the white house. in moments of transition, he has guided the cia with a steady hand as acting director not once but twice.

he is a consummate professional. everybody who works with him across agencies consider some truly to be one of our most outstanding national security team members. on behalf of all of us, thank you for your continued service. the work of protecting our nation is never done. we still have got much to do. ending the war in afghanistan and caring for those who have borne the battle. comparing for the full range of threats from the unconventional to the conventional. including things like cyber security. within our military, a continuing to ensure our men and women can serve the country they love no matter who they love. to help meet the challenges of our times, i am proud to announce my choice for the two

key members of national security. chuck hagel for secretary of defense, john brennan is director of the cia. chuck hagel is a leader our troops deserve. he is an american patriot. he served with honor alongside his own brother. when he was hit by shrapnel his brother saved him. when his brother was injured by a mine, he risked his life to pull him to safety. he bears the scars from battles but in our name. this would be historic. he would be the first person up enlisted rank to serve the secretary of defense. one of the few secretaries to have been wounded in war. the first vietnam veteran to leave the department.

chuck hagel will our troops the character and strength. they see one of their own. he is a champion and our troops and military family. he thought to give our veterans the benefit they deserve. as head of the u.s.o. he devoted himself to caring for our troops. having studied under the gi bill he helped lead the fight. having co-chaired my a.i.g. board, he knows that our armed forces collect and lives depend on good intelligence. he recognizes that american leadership is indispensable in a dangerous world. i saw this in our travels across the middle east. he understands that america stands strongest.

we stand with allies and friends. we have to keep our military the strongest this world has ever known. most importantly, he knows war is not a distraction. he understands that sending americans to fight and lead in dirt and mud is something we only do when it is absolutely necessary. my frame of reference is set. it is geared toward the guy at the bottom and would join the fighting and dying. our troops will always know that secretary chuck hagel will be there for you.

finally, he represents the bipartisan stance we need more of. for his independence and consensus, he has earned the respect of military leaders, republicans and democrats, including me. i came to admire his courage in judgment and willingness to speak his mind even if it was not popular and defied conventional wisdom. that is the spirit i want on my team, recognition that when it comes to the defense of our country we are not a democrat or republicans. we are americans. each of us has a responsibility. we are not by the interest of our party or president but by the interest of our people. thank you for agreeing to serve once more. when i am on the subject

patriots, let me say a few words about john brennan. john brennan, the men and women of the cia will have the leadership of one of the most respected intelligence persons, not to mentions smart and strength which he claims comes from growing up in new jersey. a 25 year veteran of the cia he knows what our national security demands, strong facts, analytic insights, the key. he traveled through the arabian peninsula where he camped with them in the desert. he has a desire for human dignity.

he held senior management and operational positions at the agency. he is committed to the capabilities we need. he literally built and led the terrorism room. he knows the risks they face every day. john has lost colleagues and friends, he rose to stars the grace the memorial wall. for the last year he developed and has overseen our counterterrorism strategy, a collaborative effort across the government. think about the results. more have been removed from the battlefield since any time since 9/11.

all of which makes it harder to plan and carry out large-scale attacks against our homeland. we will remain relentless against al qaeda and its affiliates. in all this work john has been tireless. people here in the white house work hard. john is legendary even in the white house for working hard. he is one of the hardest working public servants i have ever seen. i am not sure he has left in four years.

when i was at martha's vineyard, john came and did the press briefing. he was in a false and tie in august. one of the reporters asked him don't you ever get any downtime? he said i do not do downtime. he's not even smiling. [laughter] there is another reason why i value him so much, and his integrity and commitment to the values that define us as americans. he has worked to imbed our efforts and a strong legal framework. he understands we are a nation of loss. he asks the tough questions and he insists on a rigorous standards. time and again he is spoken to the american people about our policies because he recognizes we have a response ability to be as transparent as possible. you have been one of my closest advisers.

you have been a great friend. i'm deeply grateful for your extraordinary service. i am more grateful for kathy willing to put up for you. i am grateful to both of you for your service. today i can say to the men and women of the cia, in john brennan you have a leader he will fight for you every single day. you will have a leader that has my complete confidence and trust. the work of defending our nation is never done. my number one criteria in making these decisions was simple. he was going to do the best job number securing american? they have dedicated their lives to protecting our country. i am confident they will do an outstanding job. i urge the senate to confirm them as soon as possible so we

can keep our nation secure and the american people safe. congratulations. with that i want to invite each of these leaders on stage to say a few words starting with mr. leon panetta. >> first of all, let me express my deepest gratitude to the president for giving me the honor and the privilege of serving in your administration. the last four years as director of the cia and now secretary of defense i have been extremely proud to be part of your national security team and to be proud of what it has accomplished in your first term. looking ahead to the second term i want to commend

president obama on his decision to nominate chuck hagel as the next secretary of defense. let me also add as former director of the cia to commend the president for his choice of john brennan. i had the opportunity to work with john on counter-terrorism issues these last four years. he knows the cia. he will be a strong leader of that great intelligence agency. i also have known chuck for a long time as well. i had the opportunity to work with him closely, particularly in his capacity of the intelligence advisory board. i greatly appreciate the work he has done to strengthen our intelligent enterprise. it has been extremely important to our ability to improve our intelligence capabilities. i also benefited from his work when he served on our defense policy board.

chuck hagel is a patriot. he is a decorated combat veteran. he is a decorated public servant. i believe his experience, deep understanding of the security issues facing this country making the right choice to be secretary of defense. as for me, after close to 50 years of serving the american people, began in 1964 when i served as first lieutenant in the united states army. then both the legislative and executive branch positions in washington. the time has come for me to return to my wife sylvia, my three sons, their families, our six grandchildren, and my walnut farm. dealing with a different set set of nuts. [laughter]

i want to deeply think my family for giving me the fullest measure of love and support during my many absences throughout my long career in public service. i will leave with a sense of pride in what we have accomplished during these last four years, being on the president's national security team. as both director of the cia and the secretary of defense, i've always believed our fundamental measure is to keep america safe. because of the outstanding dedication of our intelligence and military professionals america is safer and more secure than it was four years ago. we have reached a turning point after more than one decade of war. as we reach that turning point,

we developed a new strategy for the 21st century. we have decimated al qaeda's leadership and weakened their effort to attack this country. we have brought wars in iraq to an honorable conclusion. we have opened up opportunities for all americans to serve in our military. we continue to support our forces, their families, and our wounded warriors. these are some of the achievements that i am proud of. let me close by expressing my profound gratitude to the outstanding team of military and civilian staff and leaders that i had the honor to serve with at the department of defense and at the white house. in particular, let me deeply thank the outstanding men and

women in uniform who have had the privilege to serve and need. those who put their lives on the line every day on distant battlefields for this country. their sacrifices teach us that freedom is not free. a strong democracy depends on a strong defense. you cannot have a strong and stable defense without a strong and stable democracy. as we continue to confront strategic challenges and fiscal austerity, my hope for the future is that the sense of duty our service members and their families exhibit every day inspires the leaders of this nation to have the courage to do what is right, to achieve the american dream, give our children a better life, and to build a more secure future. >> thank you.

i am honored by your trust and confidence and mindful of the extensive responsibilities. i want to acknowledge my family who are in chicago today. he is attending his first day of class is at depaul university. and to my friend leon panetta. thank you for your service to our country over so many years and in so many capacities. you are one of the premier public servants of our time. to follow you will be a most challenging task. i will try to live up to the standards that you, bob gates,

and others have set for this job and nation. let me also express my deep appreciation and congratulations to my friend john brennan. and to acknowledge the president's confidence and trust in john brennan. thank you, mike, for your continued service. i'm grateful for this opportunity to serve our country again. especially its men and women in uniform. these are people who give so much to this nation every day with such dignity and selflessness.

this is particularly important as we complete our mission and support our troops to a sacrifice so much more than a decade of war. am grateful for an opportunity to help continue to strengthen our country and their alliances. and advance global freedom. we help build a better world for all mankind. i will always do my best for our country and those i represent at the pentagon and for all of our citizens. i will always give you my honest and most informed counsel. thank you very much. >> thank you for your very kind remarks and the trust you placed in me when asked me to be

acting director twice. i have the honor of knowing and working with john brennan for the last 20 years. we have worked particularly closely the last three years. john brennan is an intelligence professional with deep experience in our business. and public servants with extraordinary dedication. a man of deep integrity. with senate confirmation i know he will be in all standing director of the central intelligence agency. john started his career at the cia and spent nearly a quarter century. this is a homecoming. on behalf of the talented and dedicated men and women of cia,

it is my deep honor to say "welcome home." >> mr. president, it is a tremendous honor to be nominated to be the director of the central intelligence agency. the women and men of the cia are among the most dedicated, courageous, selfless, and hard working individuals. at great personal risk and sacrifice they have made countless and valuable contributions to our national security and safety. leading the agency in which i served for 25 years would be the greatest privilege as well as the greatest responsibility of my professional life. i want to thank you for your confidence in me. even more for your confidence in constant support to the cia and those who serve the intelligence

committee. they need their support of every american especially during such security challenges. if confirmed, i will make it my mission to make sure the cia has the tools it needs to keep its mission safe and the work reflects their liberties, freedoms, and values we hold so dear. i am proud to stand here today with such patriots as a leon panetta, chuck hagel, and michael morell. i very much the forward to the opportunity to serve with another of america's great patriot, chuck hagel. i am especially proud and has to be able to stand here today with a close friend and colleague michael morell which epitomizes what it is to be a

defense professional. he has been nothing short of exemplary. i very much look forward to working with you in weeks and years ahead. i also look forward to working with congress. and-security rests on the ability of the legislative branches of our government to work as our team. while the profession often times demand secrecy, it is critically important that there be a full and open discourse on intelligence matters with the appropriate elected representatives although i consider myself neither a republican or democrat i look forward to working closely on both sides of the aisle. most importantly, my wife cathy to my children kyle, to my parents in new jersey, a shout out.

owen who is 92. i cannot be where i am today without their love, patience, understanding, and support. there's no way i can ever repay them except to say i will need it for a little bit longer. i am deeply grateful for this opportunity. it will be bittersweet to leave all of my close colleagues and friends here at the white house and that the national security staff but come to work with in respect so deeply. if confirmed by the senate i will consider it to be an honor of my life. >> these are four outstanding individuals. we are grateful to all of them. i want in particular to think

mike morell and leon panetta for their extraordinary service. i just want to repeat i hope the senate will act on these confirmations promptly. when it comes to security we do not bite to leave a lot of gaps between the time one set of leaders transitions out of another. we need to get moving quickly. one of the reasons why i am so confident that chuck hagel will be an outstanding secretary offense in john brennan of the cia, they understand that we are only successful because of the folks up and down the line in these respected institutions. folks on the ground. they're oftentimes putting their lives at risk for us. they are oftentimes i greatly

moved from washington and its politics. to have those who have been in the field, who have been in the heat of battle, who understand the decisions we make in this town and how it has an impact of ramifications for everybody who actually has to execute our national security strategies. that is something invaluable. it will provide me the kind of insight i need in making very difficult decisions. it also mean that these folks will be looking out for the people who work for them. that is something i think is absolutely critical. i am looking forward to working with the two gentlemen. they will be outstanding. thank you very much, everybody. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

>> on "washington journal," the focus on president obama's announcement. the former house intelligence committee ranking member will take your questions about the nomination of counter-terrorism adviser john brennan. we will look at the nomination of former nebraska republican senator. we will be joined by retired lieutenant colonel to talk